Pilot surveys were undertaken to determine the rate at which custodial sentences were being made in the relevant areas, the rates of aftercare cases routed to probation caseloads, the patterns of need among potential multifacility or community resources referrals, and the kinds of alternatives to imprisonment that could be developed. The surveys revealed that probation officers' estimations of who was likely to receive a custodial sentence were wrong almost half the time in Manchester and a third of the time in Wiltshire. This would pose problems for schemes operating as alternatives to custody. Intake of cases over the pilot period (12 months in Wiltshire and 15 months in Manchester) resulted in successful preparation of a community resources alternative in 22 out of 53 cases in Wiltshire and 11 out of 51 cases in Manchester. In addition to demonstrating the variety of community resources 'packages' developed for each offender, the pilot intake scheme's value lay in encouraging good probation practice and a more community-oriented approach to probation work. A survey of probation officers' preceptions of community resources alternatives showed that officers' attitudes varied widely; many officers did not perceive community resources plans as alternatives to custody. Overall, the efficacy of the community resources scheme has not been demonstrated; community multifacility schemes need to have a clear and precise identity. However, the schemes have had secondary effects in terms of the development of community resources and the way the probation services use them. Twenty-two references, a glossary of terms, and two appendixes summarizing cases included and excluded in the pilot intake programs are provided.